Forum Discussion
Hyper-V Server 2022
Free 'Microsoft Hyper-V Server' product update
Since its introduction over a decade ago in Windows Server 2008, Hyper-V technology has been, and continues to be, the foundation of Microsoft’s hypervisor platform. Hyper-V is a strategic technology for Microsoft. Microsoft continues to invest heavily in Hyper-V for a variety of scenarios such as virtualization, security, containers, gaming, and more. Hyper-V is used in Azure, Azure Local, Windows Server, Windows Client, and Xbox among others.
Starting with Microsoft Hyper-V Server 2019, the free ‘Microsoft Hyper-V Server’ product has been deprecated and is the final version of that product. Hyper-V Server 2019 is a free product available for download from the Microsoft Evaluation Center: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/evalcenter/evaluate-hyper-v-server-2019
Microsoft Hyper-V Server 2019 will continue to be supported under its lifecycle policy until January 2029, see this link for additional information: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/lifecycle/products/hyperv-server-2019.
While Microsoft has made a business decision to no longer offer the free 'Microsoft Hyper-V Server' product, this has no impact to the many other products which include the Hyper-V feature and capabilities. This change has no impact to any customers who use Windows Server or Azure Local.
For customers looking to do test or evaluation of the Hyper-V feature, Azure Local includes a 60-day free trial and can be downloaded here: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/azure-local/ . Windows Server offers a free 180-day evaluation which can be downloaded from the Evaluation Center here: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/evalcenter
Microsoft remains committed to meeting customers where they are and delivering innovation for on-premises virtualization and bringing unique hybrid capabilities like no other can combined with the power of Azure Arc. We are announcing that Microsoft Hyper-V Server 2019 was the last version of the free download product and that customers begin transitioning to one of the several other products which include Hyper-V or consider Azure.
Thank you,
Elden Christensen
Principal Group PM Manager
Windows Server Development Team
bmartindcs I would love to hear more about details of your usencase.
Is there any licensing term that forbids "hosting" VMs for own use on Windows 11 Pro using Hyper-V? You can even leverage ReFS and Storage Spaces on Windows 11 Enterprise.
Just asking if you need nothing more than Hyper-V Plus running Windows Client VMs. Technically it is the same core OS and Hyper-V. Licensing Windows host and VMs plus access apply. If you need more than just the ability to run VMs then Windows Server is viable.
SpenceFoxtrot yes the footprint and attack surface was minimal with Windows Server Hyper-V SKU compared to Windows 11 / Enterprise. You can still harden it easily like security baseline GPOs and good notes from the field about this. The OS will use more RAM compared to Hyper-V SKU. You can find which Servicesw are not used deactivate all features and optional features not needed. Eventually you have licensing for Windows 11 LTSC with lesser bells and whistles like Microsoft Store which I do not see as threat.
Just trying to think outside the box for you. Check licensing terms could imagine that this is possible with Windows Pro / Enterprise as parent OS.
If it just run Linux give.Windows 11 23H2 /24H2 preview a chance. If it runs Windows Server you need to license these anyway and at any time. There's no change, when ist Hyper-V Server 2019 is gone. Let me know if this is helpful or anything is unclear. Happy to help.
We virtualize all client servers as we onboard them. The reason being for portability ease when changing hardware, for ease of backups/restores, and for ease of DR. We keep loaner servers that we can spit a restored VM onto and have clients up in no time in the event of a significant DR situation.
We could run the VM's on a Pro machine. I am aware we can use GPO's etc to harden it, but it's overall just a stupid step backwards. MS goal is to push us all to Stack or Azure. MS has not considered the fact that the former is not an option for most of the SMB space, and the later is cost prohibited for many and also not practical for others if you have any kind of data/throughput/latency heavy LOB app. That seems to imply that MS position is that if Azure or Stack are not a fit, then you should run bare metal and/or buy Server all over again just to run the hypervisor - all of which is a step backwards.
They could have converted HV Server into Server Core with HV as a Role, without licensing required, and they can block the other features from being installed to avoid gaming the system. That would collapse the sku chain from a code standpoint.
Just seems to be another poke in the eye. I'm still bitter about NCE, so this is another fun change.
- I am quite familiar with XCP-NG and it was my next choice but there are DR reasons holding us back at the moment. Veeam recently announced support for Proxmox is coming, so that's likely what we'll be moving to after validating it etc.
bmartindcs Great - glad you’re aware of that. In terms of your security concerns, I’m sure you’re aware that having roles and features ‘available to install’, is not the same as having them ‘installed by default’. To compare with other alternatives that you’ve suggested, Proxmox is also based on and uses the ‘standard’ Debian repositories for security updates - it is therefore similarly ‘vulnerable’ to additional feature installs as Windows Server Core + Hyper-V role, assuming that the hypervisor has access to those repos (which is necessary to keep patched)
https://pve.proxmox.com/wiki/Package_Repositories#_repositories_in_proxmox_ve
XCP-NG is better - it appears it uses dedicated repos with only the relevant packages enabled - but they still allow you to install packages from other repositories using the enablerepo switch in yum - so again, if you’re looking for a hypervisor which is ‘unable’ to have an increased attack surface, rather than having a reduced surface ‘by default’, that may not entirely fit the bill either.
- Yes, we can "just deploy Server Core". Not looking for free licensing necessarily, everyone is licensed. As I stated, using Core is not the same though as it has additional features and roles in full Server OS (even in Core) vs HVS. As I also stated, we can probably through a combination of a bunch of GPO and local sec policy, restrict those roles/features but that seems to be cobbling together a way to get small attack surface like HVS had. My idea/solution was just an option like Core is during installation, for "HyperVisor" only, in that it strips all that out for us out of the box - eliminating the need to make it entirely custom to get that small attack surface that HVS had.
Hi bmartindcs thank your extending on your point and use case it is very important to learn about that and I believe that thread is not only read by us admins and consultants.
Certainly see that those that just host Linux or VDI and nothing else feel unhappy with the change of dropping the SKU. If this relates into Azure Stack HCI, I doubt this. Windows Server is technically as good as for these use cases, when you are not looking into cloud hybrid / #adaptivecloud and AVD.
Frankly have to disagree on Azure Stack HCI being the target for your use case provided.
And my strong feeling is founded by the massive change we have with Azure Stack HCI.
Without proper licensing, skilling, and / or externalization - Azure Stack HCI - today - is not that same Windows Server+ added by Azure billing and some good stuff, anymore. It needs more careful considerations.
Feel invited to read on: https://multicloud.is/tags/azure-stack-hci
Second to feel your pain that licensing Windows Server for the use of Hyper-V feels wrong when just hosting Linux or Windows Client (VDI).
ChrisAtMaf brought up a good point though.
Cheapest is Windows Server 2022 Standard OEM, until you reach the Datacenter Break Even.
In EU licenses are transferable when hardware dies or decomissioned. This is EU only, due to regulations.
Pro Tip: With Windows Server 2022 through OEM you could also license just active cores opposed to the default licensing rules. Check the OEM terms when installing they are not on Product Terms.
If this applies to your OEM license, what prevents you to license just 8 pCPUs and disable more CPUs in BIOS if these pCores are good enough for VDI hosting Windows Clients? Make notes or fetch logs for licensing compliance when you enable or disable CPUs.
As soon you have volume licensing or CSP, this is a different game.
Default licensing rules apply so usual 16 cores min. per box. And again, why not Windows Server 2022 Standard OEM in Core install mode?
It is a smaller extra fee for support via OEM. Gives a bit peace of mind of you require support, you obtain through the OEM.
Grand game could be Windows Server Standard CSP Subscription, which includes SA, or any other Volume Licensing programme your are eligible to.
Datacenter when required.
Unfortunately after reading the Licensing terms linked by Chris, there is no WS Standard allowed to run any number of VMs with Windows Client OS. As each VM is a VOSE or at least running instance by definition. Thank you Chris, because often one hears it is one or two Windows Server VMs per licensed stack. It is clear now this spans to any OS running. Bad luck.
If you have Windows Server licensed through EA or similar volume licensing programs, please mind your commitment obligations before buying CSP or OEM.bmartindcs You’re saying that you wish Microsoft would just offer Windows Server Core w/ Hyper-V role as a ‘free’ license - but for the clients you mentioned, aren’t they licensed for this anyway?
Earlier you said: ‘These users all own licenses of Windows Server’.
So can’t you just deploy Server Core for them?
https://www.microsoft.com/licensing/terms/productoffering/WindowsServerStandardDatacenterEssentials/OL#LicenseModel
'Standard edition permits use of one Running Instance of the server software in the Physical OSE on the Licensed Server (in addition to two Virtual OSEs), if the Physical OSE is used solely to host and manage the Virtual OSEs.'
